• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Official 2023/24 Premier League Thread

dingdongo said:
Does this change to the UEFA method help us or hinder us?

More importantly, Does it still.mean Chelsea are doomed!?
Click to expand...
It will benefit us, as it also takes wages to turnover into account, and the ratio will get lower, from 85% and gradually down to wages max 60% of turnover.
 
Yiddo said:
Can someone explain how this works? Nottingham Forest have a wealthy chairman who has been spending his money but because they spent more than they make they are punished, yet United are £750+ million in debt but can spend £100m on a player every season but its fine because they bring in a load of cash even though they are still in debt?

I’m genuinely confused, i don’t claim to have any knowledge on FFP.
Click to expand...
If you run continuously with operational losses you'll end up in trouble.

Most of United's debt is from a leveraged but out. ie pay for ownership of a company by raising private finance (then pay the interest/fees to said lender). Operationally United are massive so generally speaking can balance those books.
 
Kandi1977 said:
It will benefit us, as it also takes wages to turnover into account, and the ratio will get lower, from 85% and gradually down to wages max 60% of turnover.
Click to expand...
I think it will help us in the short term as we are probably the biggest club already close to those ratios, so minimal adjustment. However big clubs with big turnovers (even pie in the sky ones) will still have a large budget to work with in this system. I think the current PL allowable losses system is actually worse for them as some clubs, like Chelsea, haven't got a clue how to make a profit, and Villa would be having to apply the handbrake after their recent losses announcement, for example. Even Arsenal have recorded losses for 5 years on the spin.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
I think it will help us in the short term as we are probably the biggest club already close to those ratios, so minimal adjustment. However big clubs with big turnovers (even pie in the sky ones) will still have a large budget to work with in this system. I think the current PL allowable losses system is actually worse for them as some clubs, like Chelsea, haven't got a clue how to make a profit, and Villa would be having to apply the handbrake after their recent losses announcement, for example. Even Arsenal have recorded losses for 5 years on the spin.
Click to expand...
As I understand it, the wages to turnover rules don't replace the current PSR rules, but rather add to them, with minor adjustments.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Ah...so you have to meet both criteria?
Click to expand...
Think there will just be the new rules, they were partly brought in because closer to uefa rules and clubs found difficulty with the old rules and the uefa rules together.

edit, in the future the 4 most important football club executive posts below the owner.
1. chairman/chief executive.
2. manager.
3. chief scout/director of football.
4. ffp compliance officer.
 
spurs8 said:
Think there will just be the new rules, they were partly brought in because closer to uefa rules and clubs found difficulty with the old rules and the uefa rules together.

edit, in the future the 4 most important football club executive posts below the owner.
1. chairman/chief executive.
2. manager.
3. chief scout/director of football.
4. ffp compliance officer.
Click to expand...
From what I've read just now, they are currently in discussion to formulate new financial rules...and currently it's looking like the same as UEFA but at 85%.player costs to turnover. (UEFA eventually tapering down to 70%).

When you think about it...that favours the big 6 at those percentages when looking at turnover.
Plus at 85% it hardly protects clubs from a sustainability angle. Still rack up losses.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
From what I've read just now, they are currently in discussion to formulate new financial rules...and currently it's looking like the same as UEFA but at 85%.player costs to turnover. (UEFA eventually tapering down to 70%).

When you think about it...that favours the big 6 at those percentages when looking at turnover.
Plus at 85% it hardly protects clubs from a sustainability angle. Still rack up losses.
Click to expand...
Yes, does favour big 6 or so, clubs in euro comps because their revenue will be higher than clubs not in euro comps, quite surprised non euro clubs went along with it.
UEFA did think out aloud about a flat cap, ie not tied to individual club revenue but didn't follow it up, for now.
Can imagine if the likes of Real Madrid/Manchester United had a similar or the same cap as say AFC Bournemouth all hell would break loose ! I suppose though the flat cap would be quite high, or at the median, so AFC Bournemouth wouldn't have the revenue to get up to it. Gets complicated !
 
spurs8 said:
Yes, does favour big 6 or so, clubs in euro comps because their revenue will be higher than clubs not in euro comps, quite surprised non euro clubs went along with it.
UEFA did think out aloud about a flat cap, ie not tied to individual club revenue but didn't follow it up, for now.
Can imagine if the likes of Real Madrid/Manchester United had a similar or the same cap as say AFC Bournemouth all hell would break loose ! I suppose though the flat cap would be quite high, or at the median, so AFC Bournemouth wouldn't have the revenue to get up to it. Gets complicated !
Click to expand...

Flat caps would definitely suit Yorkshire clubs best
 
How can you have a 6 point reduction reduced to 4 for 'co-operation' and then appeal? Surely if the appeal concludes the original 6 points as fair you lose the 2 point co-operation reduction for appealing as you are no longer co-operating? Even if Forest get the 6 down to 4, they are no better off?!
 
spurs8 said:
Yes, does favour big 6 or so, clubs in euro comps because their revenue will be higher than clubs not in euro comps, quite surprised non euro clubs went along with it.
UEFA did think out aloud about a flat cap, ie not tied to individual club revenue but didn't follow it up, for now.
Can imagine if the likes of Real Madrid/Manchester United had a similar or the same cap as say AFC Bournemouth all hell would break loose ! I suppose though the flat cap would be quite high, or at the median, so AFC Bournemouth wouldn't have the revenue to get up to it. Gets complicated !
Click to expand...

But you can't budget on european money. Because next season you might not qualify. Then have to cut your spending by selling players.
 
Lilbaz said:
But you can't budget on european money. Because next season you might not qualify. Then have to cut your spending by selling players.
Click to expand...
Spurs this season...
PL current rules are over a rolling 3 years. Not sure about uefa whether discrete years, or the likely new PL rules.
But as you say the euro money can disappear. A reason why the bigger clubs try re-jigging arrangements to try and ensure qualification.
 
spurs8 said:
Spurs this season...
PL current rules are over a rolling 3 years. Not sure about uefa whether discrete years, or the likely new PL rules.
But as you say the euro money can disappear. A reason why the bigger clubs try re-jigging arrangements to try and ensure qualification.
Click to expand...

Uefa is jan to dec. Yearly basis. Although there is an allowable loss of €60m over 3 seasons.

As usual. Written by lawyers and university students to make it unintelligible.
 
Charges update.
Emirates Marketing Project, Everton, Nottm Forest, and latest Leicester.
Chelsea maybe.
Wonder how this is all going to play out...
 
spurs8 said:
Charges update.
Emirates Marketing Project, Everton, Nottm Forest, and latest Leicester.
Chelsea maybe.
Wonder how this is all going to play out...
Click to expand...

Chelsea definitely. They've already admitted dodgy deals under roman. Prem just figuring out what the charges are.

Saudi Sportswashing Machine, villa are close. Utd have a tax issue or something.

Spurs and brighton going to have a free run in the transfer window in the summer.
 
Lilbaz said:
Chelsea definitely. They've already admitted dodgy deals under roman. Prem just figuring out what the charges are.

Saudi Sportswashing Machine, villa are close. Utd have a tax issue or something.

Spurs and brighton going to have a free run in the transfer window in the summer.
Click to expand...
Leicester should go balls out and spend 300mill so they can try and finish top 8ish. Then just accept a few points off for the next two seasons so they can get comfortably back in the PL.

Is there an increased punishment for a 2nd offense??
 
A pod I was listening to earlier said Chelsea have to raise £200 by June 30th otherwise they will be in big doo doo
Good luck with that when it's the Euro's same time
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back